A decade ago was the stagnant Ballmer days though. Thanks to Satya the stock has exploded in the decade since. Realistically if you were a worker there in that decade and saved your ESPP/Bonus stock/on hire stock you are a most likely millionaire this morning. Sure they wont give the sexy package of Google or Uber, but thats a solid return for a company that gives pretty sweet(outside of Azure) WLB.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Sam Altman fired as CEO of OpenAI
- Thread starter BennyBlanco
- Start date
FUBARx89
Member
Translation - "I thought I could get away with it, but look at all the pressure. My arse is falling out."
E-Cat
Member
Losing my shit at you thinking Tom Warren was the first to know about this
No. The non-profit clause was rendered BS as soon as it became clear they needed a shitload of money to train their LLMs and run queries. Billions of dollars, for that matter.
Barlow
Member
He wasn't the first to know, he was the one who broke the news though. His (likely MS) sources told him.
You can still acquire money to run things but be non-profit. I don't think you know what non-profit means.
ChuckeRearmed
Member
And the cars were created for the betterment of humanity /s
He didn’t break the news. You claiming he was the one who broke the news because he started his tweet with ‘BREAKING’ is frankly hilarious.
it’s already common knowledge now that Microsoft was blindsided by the decision
You’re not getting $10bn investment and getting in competition with Google without plans to make profitable products.
E-Cat
Member
The most ironic outcome is the most likely.
ChuckeRearmed
Member
These 10b are not the plain cash. For example they are also azure credits. And paid in tranches.
How quick a subsidiary was set up with Sam Altman and a coup d'état in effect to drain employees I would say they weren't that blindsided. If I had to guess about what wasn't openly communicated with the board it would be that Altman was their Mason Morfit on the board doing things that he wasn't openly sharing with them. We still haven't figured out what the internal turmoil was.
Thirty7ven
Banned
Seriously can people stop playing dumb for once?
E-Cat
Member
We know exactly what the internal turmoil was if you read the Atlantic article, or have followed things more closely over the past few months. Sam wanted to push out new product after new product to the public, set up multi-decabillion dollar chip manufacturing operations to compete with NVIDIA, talking to the Softbank CEO Masayoshi Son about making AI hardware in a new company in partnership with Jony Ive...
Meanwhile, idealist & decelerationist Ilya Sutskever took a spiritual/bipolar turn, literally burning effigies symbolizing non-aligned AI at the stake, repeating the mantra "feel the AGI" to employees, basically going off the deep end. He then convinced the board that Sam was going too far, too fast, and against the company's founding principles; an action that he later came to regret. There's nothing sinister or shady going on. The bonehead BOD religiously followed the non-profit doctrine, rather having OAI burn to the ground than seeing Sam's commercial pursuits flourish -- which is exactly what's happening.
Last edited:
Yeah, this was an interesting turn of events and I doubt we have seen the actual conclusion yet. Non-competes/Non-solicitations are void/prohibited in California too (Although I'm sure some special cases may be allowed). In the event the folks move over to Microsoft, I wonder what the board will do with the underlying technology and trade secrets/Intellectual Property if that is all that mostly remains to protect - let alone the risk of folks just bringing it right over to Microsoft? Likely just sell it at a reduced/tanked price, if that. If anything, Microsoft will just say it is different enough to not be similar lol
Would Microsoft have been successful with buying OpenAI initially (including its valuation price) without regulation intervening? This may end up benefiting Microsoft more than anyone, but I'm curious on where Ilya goes. Will he try and stabilize the current company? Based on him signing that pledge with the rest of the executives/employees, I'm betting he'll bounce and bring his talent to Microsoft (along with the rest) - not sure if they'll get their equivalent positions though. That or he spawns his own company.
The plan to be absorbed by Microsoft doesn't sound as farfetched now though.
Would Microsoft have been successful with buying OpenAI initially (including its valuation price) without regulation intervening? This may end up benefiting Microsoft more than anyone, but I'm curious on where Ilya goes. Will he try and stabilize the current company? Based on him signing that pledge with the rest of the executives/employees, I'm betting he'll bounce and bring his talent to Microsoft (along with the rest) - not sure if they'll get their equivalent positions though. That or he spawns his own company.
The plan to be absorbed by Microsoft doesn't sound as farfetched now though.
Not you thinking they already had office buildings set up and labeled desks etc.
Not that hard to summon an emergency board meeting over the weekend when it’s a major issue concerning a $10bn investment into AI that’s now a core of all Microsoft’s enterprise offerings.
Everyone was expecting MS shares to take a dive today and you think they’d be twiddling their thumbs?
Never gets old to see people attack those who don’t fall for their implausible conspiracy theories.
E-Cat
Member
Whatever they do, they must not make a profit so as not to interfere w/ the company charter.
Seems like Ilya came to realize the error of his (bipolar) ways and had a "come to Jesus moment". Sam even redeemed him w/ heart emojis.
MS couldn't have done it without the utterly incompetent OAI board. It's almost criminal, except it isn't.
Last edited:
E-Cat
Member
Yah, this goddamn badass CEO is merely upholding his fiduciary duty to the shareholders of Microsoft. They're not exactly sharpening the tips of pencils here, this is civilizational level order consequential stuff. OAI had lightning in a bottle, then attempted to feed MS a thousand demon cocks from hell. What did they expect, a limp-dick indecisive countermove? Not our bad boy Satya.
Last edited:
Vicetrailia
Member
Of course this shit would happen one day. We're in a monopoly/oligopoly society, so fuck yes there's no other expectation except for this to happen.
To happen this way is the interesting part, couldn't predict it and now MS stock is up.
Last edited:
Chittagong
Gold Member
Last edited:
Tams
Member
At least they’ll have a decent budget.
Not at all. Emmett Shear in this should have a water pistol.
E-Cat
Member
Things are moving at warp speed
Last edited:
SirKicksalot
Member
Hawking Radiation
Member
Lol woke up to this this morning. What the fuck is going on over there?
E-Cat
Member
Short summary:
Tams
Member
I want the singularity and AGI to happen sooner.
Anyway, it was mostly the immature way they went about it. If they are fit to on a board of directors, then I should be on one too.
Anyway, it's not our opinions that matter. It's the more than 5/7ths of OpenAI's very own employees who are batting for Altman and Brockman. And I don't think they care an iota what any of us here think.
Last edited:
E-Cat
Member
Me too, I'm an accelerationist.
Sam Altman is still trying to return as OpenAI CEO
/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/25099423/1797579059.jpg)
Sam Altman is still trying to return as OpenAI CEO
The drama at OpenAI is far from over.
www.theverge.com
Last edited:
StreetsofBeige
Gold Member
So Altman was ousted, MS hired him and others to lead an AI division, and OpenAI employees are hoping Altman comes back? How is this possible. The ship has sailed.
Lord Panda
The Sea is Always Right
I better start saving and archiving all my useful ChatGPT conversations in case the whole service implodes.
E-Cat
Member
If the alternative is 700+ out of 770 OpenAI employees quitting, who knows what could happen?
The MS hire doesn't appear to be final, but a 'holding pattern' as discussed above.
Last edited:
ChuckeRearmed
Member
It is absolutely crazy situation.
I'm aware that Altman was looking for commercial pursuits but you forgot one big player that Altman is very close with and was seeking a partnership with as early as just last week:
Subscribe to read
www.ft.com
What I'm saying is that we don't know how the BoD were convinced to fire him, what exactly Sam Altman was not candid in communicating with the board, unless the Atlantic article explains that (it's behind a paywall and the information I'm reading is only third hand). It's all very well if you think the companys values are off the deep end or that the BoD are boneheaded but the board was obviously convinced that he wasn't candid in his communication with them.
When did I say they had buildings ready with labelled desks and that simultaneously they were twiddling their thumbs?
I'm saying Sam Altman was likely pushing MS's agenda to the board and MS were fully aware of the boards non profit values and principles but much like Mason Morfit and Nintendo they had somebody they were allied with to try and push that idea of more money and scale on the board even if they knew it probably wouldn't work. They were prepared for this contingency and the coup d'état and subsidiary is just a way of still getting that when the board rejected the ideas Altman was apparently duplicitously pushing.
Last edited:
E-Cat
Member
What made Ilya Sutskever change his mind? Could it be that, in his hubris, he failed to read the room, namely that 90%+ of employees still support Sam as CEO? This doesn't speak to fraud or deception, or anything serious like that.
I don't think we're going to learn the exact reasons behind the firing, but it's probably got to do with him not being super candid with the board about the extent of the dealmaking on the chip factory, etc. It doesn't need to be anything nebulous or sinister, per se, just feeling left out of the loop and uncomfortable with how fast things are developing in that direction. That's my Occam's razor read of the situation.
Chittagong
Gold Member
ChuckeRearmed
Member
Ideally for Microsoft, it would be getter for Sam and co. to return and for the board to resign.
E-Cat
Member
Microsoft bought 49% of OpenAI and has invested over $10bn. ChatGPT is deeply ingrained in Microsoft’s AI efforts. OpenAI uses Microsoft as their exclusive technical partner. Of course they’ve been in tune with Microsoft’s agenda for ages now.
You think they put in $10bn for charity?
all this, because they made an easy decision after an emergency board decision over the weekend? A decision that would certainly drive shareholder enthusiasm and rescue a perilous situation?
There’s no tech giant that can’t move this fast if need be.
Where are these dumbass questions coming from? Who said they put $10bn for Charity?
You think MS didn't want to own the majority share for a little more money? Obviously the board doesn't and didn’t want MS making the decisions at the company. So yes they're 'in tune' but they have differences in strategy and principle. The main one being the nonprofit part and the board deciding to keep the majority share so that it isn't going to listen to MS on every agenda they may have.
Now when you're done sucking MS' dick maybe consider that I didn't say MS's decision wasn't the right one to drive shareholder enthusiasm or that it was difficult. I'm saying they're playing their hand in getting what they want from OpenAI through this subsidiary/Altman and the coup d'état because the decision of the board was that they didn't want to do what Altman was trying to push on the board, which was in the interest of MS and not OpenAIs principles or values. It's almost like a hostile takeover without taking over the company even if they absolutely would have loved to.
Last edited:
bitbydeath
Member
Sam should really look into why he was suddenly fired without cause, and who could possibly gain from that, I would not be surprised to hear Microsoft being behind that decision.
gaming_again
Member
I'd fire my CEO if he refused to use his fucking shift key.